posted at 1:41 pm on July 30, 2011 by Allahpundit

The vote’s set for 2:15 p.m. ET or shortly thereafter. With the outcome assured, why bother going through the motions and formally administering the coup de grace? Simple: Reid’s going to call a cloture vote on something at around 1 a.m. ET tonight (he has to do so for procedural reasons in order to beat the clock on Tuesday), and if he can’t hammer out a deal with McConnell before then, he might be tempted to call Senate Republicans’ bluff by offering his own bill as it currently stands and daring them to filibuster it. Boehner wants to discourage that by killing that bill now and forcing him, at the very least, to present something tonight that’s more favorable to Republicans.

Per the last link, an intriguing hint that Senate Dems might cave at the last second:

Reid, a canny legislative infighter, appears to be leaving himself a safety valve, however: The Democratic leader has set an evening Senate vote that essentially would leave Boehner’s bill on parliamentary life support — leaving Senate leaders the option of revive it at the last minute if no other deal to raise the debt ceiling is reached.

I assume that means they might strip out the BBA and pass the rest of Boehner’s bill as is, and then hope that Boehner can get a few Democrats to join him next time in passing that through the House. Meanwhile, what happens if Reid’s bill fails tonight? Well, then things get messy: “Even if a bipartisan accord is reached when the Senate is in the cloture process, Reid would need unanimous consent to swap in any compromise measure, an unlikely scenario given the passions in the fight.” I.e. DeMint or Rand Paul could block any new compromise bill before Tuesday on their own, which means it’s now or never. No wonder veteran lawmakers are starting to think they won’t make the deadline. We’ll know more soon: Reid’s called a presser for 3 p.m. ET, no doubt to whine about the House shooting his own bill down.

It’s going to be a long day, so here’s your thread. Stand by for updates, and if you missed Ed’s post this morning about Reid’s new and “improved” bill, read that for essential background. In fact, it’s even less improved than you think: According to CBO, the total savings in the new bill are the same as the savings in the previous version. Exit question: Would DeMint or Paul really hold out on their own and make Treasury hit the ceiling if a bipartisan deal’s been brokered? I’m guessing they’d force Reid to grant them some sort of vote, maybe on a balanced-budget amendment, as their price for relenting.

Update: Another exit question for you. How long will it be today before we hear the first whispers about a two- or three-day debt-ceiling hike in order to keep negotiations going? If Reid’s deadline for passing something really is 1 a.m., he’d better have a bill to that effect ready to go.

Update: Via John McCormack, Senate Republicans have sent a letter to Reid urging him not to waste his time with the current bill. But there’s a hitch:

Last I heard, Joe Manchin is still a no so Reid is stuck at 56. Anyone think Manchin will hold out, though, if Reid can get to 59 with Republicans?

Update: That’s that. Reid’s bill burns in the House, 173/246 — with 11 Democrats voting no. Not sure who they are yet; probably liberals who were unhappy with his cuts-only approach, but we’ll see when the roll comes out. A curious detail: Two Republicans initially voted yes before changing their votes. Stand by while we wait to find out who they are.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky, said Saturday afternoon that he had talked to President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden “within the last hour” and is “confident and optimistic” that there will be an “agreement within the very near future.”

A national default “is not going to happen,” McConnell said.

Update: Late-afternoon news from Politico: Republican moderates are warning Boehner that they don’t intend to take this plunge alone.

“House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) met Saturday with a group of two or three dozen moderates, who told him they want a debt-limit deal that attracts a broad swath of Republicans, not just Democrats and a handful of centrists.

According to participants, Boehner agreed with the premise: It’s not tenable for him to move forward on a bill that only gets support from a small portion of the Republican Conference.”

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

It is incomprehensible to actually consider raising the debt ceiling an unprecedented $2.4 trillion, from the current $14.3 trillion, without massive spending cuts, before the nation is bankrupt.

The current interest payment is a staggering $300 billion a year; and this money has to be borrowed each month; borrowing to pay interest on the debt; and the Dems want to borrow another $2.4 trillion and cut virtually nothing. The Reps are not much better, as Boehner’s bill was only going to cut, at most, $100 billion a year for 10 years.

Massive cuts need to start immediately. They need to cut at least $2.4 trillion as a part of any deal to increase the debt ceiling by $2.4 trillion; and cut at least $1 trillion a year for the next 10 years as a part of a solution to this financial crisis before it is too late, and the nation cannot recover, and is reduced to bankruptcy.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky, said Saturday afternoon that he had talked to President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden “within the last hour” and is “confident and optimistic” that there will be an “agreement within the very near future.”

Funny, but I have zero confidence in whatever agreement is cobbled together.

John Boehner’s flailing performance may actually have a silver lining to conservatives’ advantage. When his plan and the end game blow up in the House Republicans’ face as it surely will, a lot of the new conservatives who decided to get on the team, get their asses in line, and side with the Speaker will be permanently against him and for conservatism.

Let’s not forget that one young congressmen stood up for the team and loyalty and voted for No Child Left Behind to help his President. Then when he realized he’d been betrayed and NCLB stank as bad as conservatives had said it would, Jim DeMint left his old ways and became the champion of the right.

Boehner should have remembered his history. Or at least Barry Jackson should have. It’s part of his legacy.

I read that this morning and almost cried, since DeMint said that he won’t run again. While I believe in term limits, DeMint is that rarest of exceptions who I would be more than happy for him to be there for as long as he wanted. DeMint and Sessions, they don’t get any better than that in the Senate, although Rand Paul is right behind them.

So, McConnell and Boehner have been talking with Obama. Now Reid and Pelosi are in with Obama. McConnell and Boehner just had a press conference in which Boehner said he was confident that the right people were in the room and a deal would get done, AND asked where was the President’s plan.

So here’s my guess: Boehner and McConnell have a deal with Obama. It’s strong for the GOP (relative to any form of compromise) with the only concession removal of the BBA vote requirement. Barry is allowed to present it as his plan. He’s now begging and pleading with Nancy to accept it. Reid is in there simply to keep Nancy from bludgeoning Barry to a pulp.

Libertarians have a logic gap about less government. They want government for their protection and to be free to do whatever they want to do (defense and economics), but they forget and deny any role of government in promoting the health and future of society (pro-life and the preservation of marriage).

Jonah Goldberg has an interesting column right after the 2008 election:

I read that this morning and almost cried, since DeMint said that he won’t run again. While I believe in term limits, DeMint is that rarest of exceptions who I would be more than happy for him to be there for as long as he wanted. DeMint and Sessions, they don’t get any better than that in the Senate, although Rand Paul is right behind them.

TxAnn56 on July 30, 2011 at 4:25 PM

Oh, no, I didn’t know that. He was re-elected in 2010. I guess he figures four more years to fight after the 2012 elections–either to help right the ship or to keep scuttling Obama & the Dems.

Libertarians have a logic gap about less government. They want government for their protection and to be free to do whatever they want to do (defense and economics), but they forget and deny any role of government in promoting the health and future of society (pro-life and the preservation of marriage).

Like I said, I’m pro-life. Gov’t should have limited but important goals. Protecting life, insuring contracts and property rights are upheld. Providing a basic police force and military. Etc.

As for dictating what people put in their body or what they do in the bedroom – that’s none of the government’s business.

But let’s not side track this thread. I was just responding to a comment that caught my eye.

So here’s my guess: Boehner and McConnell have a deal with Obama. It’s strong for the GOP (relative to any form of compromise) with the only concession removal of the BBA vote requirement. Barry is allowed to present it as his plan. He’s now begging and pleading with Nancy to accept it. Reid is in there simply to keep Nancy from bludgeoning Barry to a pulp.

BKeyser on July 30, 2011 at 4:25 PM

Why would they allow Barry to take credit? To hand him the next election?

The late-night jousting in the Senate followed a vote on House Speaker John A. Boehner’s debt-limit measure, which would extend the Treasury’s borrowing power until early next year and force another economy-rattling fistfight within a few months.

Drafted largely by aides to Reid and McConnell last weekend, the measure was originally designed to appeal to the more centrist Senate. But Boehner (R-Ohio) could not rally enough support from his tea-party-influenced caucus and had to rewrite it at the 11th hour to add a provision that would compel Congress to adopt a constitutional amendment requiring a balanced federal budget.

Keep hearing all this BS about “compromise” from Dems. What have they compromised on? By all accounts they look to get debt ceiling hike and deferral of issue past 2012, in exchange for toothless baloney. Where’s the damn compromise?

Wow all the dems are doing are talking about how the republicans are not compromsing. Wow these dems are nuts. They are all saying the same thing the Republicans don’t want compromise and they all want the US to go into default. Then call the Republicans names and offer no solutions. The Dems are taking no resposibility for anything. It’s all the Republicans fault since Bush. They are nuts.

Looking at the way to polls are going this week, I think the Dems are losing the PR game. If we watch it and aren’t fooled, then I expect many others who are tuning in aren’t fooled as well. They’re just not here commenting.

Whatever they pass, the wool is so think now it’s not doing much good when they try to pull it over people’s eyes.

1) Never was going to be a “default” regardless of the dem talking points…
2) There was always going to be a “deal”…
3) Our “thought leaders” were always going to find a way to what’s best for us whether we liked it or not
4) Our Gov’t will continue to hurt us, beat us down and make us write bad checks…

Wow all the dems are doing are talking about how the republicans are not compromsing. Wow these dems are nuts. They are all saying the same thing the Republicans don’t want compromise and they all want the US to go into default. Then call the Republicans names and offer no solutions. The Dems are taking no resposibility for anything. It’s all the Republicans fault since Bush. They are nuts.

Brat4life on July 30, 2011 at 5:03 PM

And this is exactly why the Reps are always on the defensive. The Dems are always on the offensive in the public debate with their rhetoric, and the Reps act like they do not know what the word “offense” or “attack” means. Hence, the Dems win even when they should be losing.

The Demacrats start a large fire and the Republicans attempt to put it out but—wait!!!-The Democrats (and their MSM enablers) scream “If you try to put the fire out, we’ll blame you guys for starting it in the first place”. So the Republicans say “OK let it continue to burn but, please, not quite so intensely.” This is called “compromise”.

I don’t trust this President and I don’t trust the Democrats. Why is he calling up the Democrats, for a little tea and crumpets, before he calls in the Republicans? The President has been doing nothing, nothing, but trying to pin this on the Republicans for over a month so, are they getting their plan together, not for the good of the country, but to pin this on the Republicans?

He should have all the leaders in the room and be saying nothing behind anyone’s back. When you have the level of trust they have now, you really need to be careful, if you want a positive result. That’s the clue, they’re not looking for a positive result, they’re looking for a result that makes them look like the good guys and hangs anything bad to come out of it, on the Republicans.